Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Closed 1 year ago.
Locked. This question and its answers are locked because the question is off-topic but has historical significance. It is not currently accepting new answers or interactions.
I want to create a URL shortener service where you can write a long URL into an input field and the service shortens the URL to "http://www.example.org/abcdef".
Instead of "abcdef" there can be any other string with six characters containing a-z, A-Z and 0-9. That makes 56~57 billion possible strings.
My approach:
I have a database table with three columns:
id, integer, auto-increment
long, string, the long URL the user entered
short, string, the shortened URL (or just the six characters)
I would then insert the long URL into the table. Then I would select the auto-increment value for "id" and build a hash of it. This hash should then be inserted as "short". But what sort of hash should I build? Hash algorithms like MD5 create too long strings. I don't use these algorithms, I think. A self-built algorithm will work, too.
My idea:
For "http://www.google.de/" I get the auto-increment id 239472. Then I do the following steps:
short = '';
if divisible by 2, add "a"+the result to short
if divisible by 3, add "b"+the result to short
... until I have divisors for a-z and A-Z.
That could be repeated until the number isn't divisible any more. Do you think this is a good approach? Do you have a better idea?
Due to the ongoing interest in this topic, I've published an efficient solution to GitHub, with implementations for JavaScript, PHP, Python and Java. Add your solutions if you like :)
I would continue your "convert number to string" approach. However, you will realize that your proposed algorithm fails if your ID is a prime and greater than 52.
Theoretical background
You need a Bijective Function f. This is necessary so that you can find a inverse function g('abc') = 123 for your f(123) = 'abc' function. This means:
There must be no x1, x2 (with x1 ≠ x2) that will make f(x1) = f(x2),
and for every y you must be able to find an x so that f(x) = y.
How to convert the ID to a shortened URL
Think of an alphabet we want to use. In your case, that's [a-zA-Z0-9]. It contains 62 letters.
Take an auto-generated, unique numerical key (the auto-incremented id of a MySQL table for example).
For this example, I will use 12510 (125 with a base of 10).
Now you have to convert 12510 to X62 (base 62).
12510 = 2×621 + 1×620 = [2,1]
This requires the use of integer division and modulo. A pseudo-code example:
digits = []
while num > 0
remainder = modulo(num, 62)
digits.push(remainder)
num = divide(num, 62)
digits = digits.reverse
Now map the indices 2 and 1 to your alphabet. This is how your mapping (with an array for example) could look like:
0 → a
1 → b
...
25 → z
...
52 → 0
61 → 9
With 2 → c and 1 → b, you will receive cb62 as the shortened URL.
http://shor.ty/cb
How to resolve a shortened URL to the initial ID
The reverse is even easier. You just do a reverse lookup in your alphabet.
e9a62 will be resolved to "4th, 61st, and 0th letter in the alphabet".
e9a62 = [4,61,0] = 4×622 + 61×621 + 0×620 = 1915810
Now find your database-record with WHERE id = 19158 and do the redirect.
Example implementations (provided by commenters)
C++
Python
Ruby
Haskell
C#
CoffeeScript
Perl
Why would you want to use a hash?
You can just use a simple translation of your auto-increment value to an alphanumeric value. You can do that easily by using some base conversion. Say you character space (A-Z, a-z, 0-9, etc.) has 62 characters, convert the id to a base-40 number and use the characters as the digits.
public class UrlShortener {
private static final String ALPHABET = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789";
private static final int BASE = ALPHABET.length();
public static String encode(int num) {
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
while ( num > 0 ) {
sb.append( ALPHABET.charAt( num % BASE ) );
num /= BASE;
}
return sb.reverse().toString();
}
public static int decode(String str) {
int num = 0;
for ( int i = 0; i < str.length(); i++ )
num = num * BASE + ALPHABET.indexOf(str.charAt(i));
return num;
}
}
Not an answer to your question, but I wouldn't use case-sensitive shortened URLs. They are hard to remember, usually unreadable (many fonts render 1 and l, 0 and O and other characters very very similar that they are near impossible to tell the difference) and downright error prone. Try to use lower or upper case only.
Also, try to have a format where you mix the numbers and characters in a predefined form. There are studies that show that people tend to remember one form better than others (think phone numbers, where the numbers are grouped in a specific form). Try something like num-char-char-num-char-char. I know this will lower the combinations, especially if you don't have upper and lower case, but it would be more usable and therefore useful.
My approach: Take the Database ID, then Base36 Encode it. I would NOT use both Upper AND Lowercase letters, because that makes transmitting those URLs over the telephone a nightmare, but you could of course easily extend the function to be a base 62 en/decoder.
Here is my PHP 5 class.
<?php
class Bijective
{
public $dictionary = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789";
public function __construct()
{
$this->dictionary = str_split($this->dictionary);
}
public function encode($i)
{
if ($i == 0)
return $this->dictionary[0];
$result = '';
$base = count($this->dictionary);
while ($i > 0)
{
$result[] = $this->dictionary[($i % $base)];
$i = floor($i / $base);
}
$result = array_reverse($result);
return join("", $result);
}
public function decode($input)
{
$i = 0;
$base = count($this->dictionary);
$input = str_split($input);
foreach($input as $char)
{
$pos = array_search($char, $this->dictionary);
$i = $i * $base + $pos;
}
return $i;
}
}
A Node.js and MongoDB solution
Since we know the format that MongoDB uses to create a new ObjectId with 12 bytes.
a 4-byte value representing the seconds since the Unix epoch,
a 3-byte machine identifier,
a 2-byte process id
a 3-byte counter (in your machine), starting with a random value.
Example (I choose a random sequence)
a1b2c3d4e5f6g7h8i9j1k2l3
a1b2c3d4 represents the seconds since the Unix epoch,
4e5f6g7 represents machine identifier,
h8i9 represents process id
j1k2l3 represents the counter, starting with a random value.
Since the counter will be unique if we are storing the data in the same machine we can get it with no doubts that it will be duplicate.
So the short URL will be the counter and here is a code snippet assuming that your server is running properly.
const mongoose = require('mongoose');
const Schema = mongoose.Schema;
// Create a schema
const shortUrl = new Schema({
long_url: { type: String, required: true },
short_url: { type: String, required: true, unique: true },
});
const ShortUrl = mongoose.model('ShortUrl', shortUrl);
// The user can request to get a short URL by providing a long URL using a form
app.post('/shorten', function(req ,res){
// Create a new shortUrl */
// The submit form has an input with longURL as its name attribute.
const longUrl = req.body["longURL"];
const newUrl = ShortUrl({
long_url : longUrl,
short_url : "",
});
const shortUrl = newUrl._id.toString().slice(-6);
newUrl.short_url = shortUrl;
console.log(newUrl);
newUrl.save(function(err){
console.log("the new URL is added");
})
});
I keep incrementing an integer sequence per domain in the database and use Hashids to encode the integer into a URL path.
static hashids = Hashids(salt = "my app rocks", minSize = 6)
I ran a script to see how long it takes until it exhausts the character length. For six characters it can do 164,916,224 links and then goes up to seven characters. Bitly uses seven characters. Under five characters looks weird to me.
Hashids can decode the URL path back to a integer but a simpler solution is to use the entire short link sho.rt/ka8ds3 as a primary key.
Here is the full concept:
function addDomain(domain) {
table("domains").insert("domain", domain, "seq", 0)
}
function addURL(domain, longURL) {
seq = table("domains").where("domain = ?", domain).increment("seq")
shortURL = domain + "/" + hashids.encode(seq)
table("links").insert("short", shortURL, "long", longURL)
return shortURL
}
// GET /:hashcode
function handleRequest(req, res) {
shortURL = req.host + "/" + req.param("hashcode")
longURL = table("links").where("short = ?", shortURL).get("long")
res.redirect(301, longURL)
}
C# version:
public class UrlShortener
{
private static String ALPHABET = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789";
private static int BASE = 62;
public static String encode(int num)
{
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
while ( num > 0 )
{
sb.Append( ALPHABET[( num % BASE )] );
num /= BASE;
}
StringBuilder builder = new StringBuilder();
for (int i = sb.Length - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
builder.Append(sb[i]);
}
return builder.ToString();
}
public static int decode(String str)
{
int num = 0;
for ( int i = 0, len = str.Length; i < len; i++ )
{
num = num * BASE + ALPHABET.IndexOf( str[(i)] );
}
return num;
}
}
You could hash the entire URL, but if you just want to shorten the id, do as marcel suggested. I wrote this Python implementation:
https://gist.github.com/778542
Take a look at https://hashids.org/ it is open source and in many languages.
Their page outlines some of the pitfalls of other approaches.
If you don't want re-invent the wheel ... http://lilurl.sourceforge.net/
// simple approach
$original_id = 56789;
$shortened_id = base_convert($original_id, 10, 36);
$un_shortened_id = base_convert($shortened_id, 36, 10);
alphabet = map(chr, range(97,123)+range(65,91)) + map(str,range(0,10))
def lookup(k, a=alphabet):
if type(k) == int:
return a[k]
elif type(k) == str:
return a.index(k)
def encode(i, a=alphabet):
'''Takes an integer and returns it in the given base with mappings for upper/lower case letters and numbers 0-9.'''
try:
i = int(i)
except Exception:
raise TypeError("Input must be an integer.")
def incode(i=i, p=1, a=a):
# Here to protect p.
if i <= 61:
return lookup(i)
else:
pval = pow(62,p)
nval = i/pval
remainder = i % pval
if nval <= 61:
return lookup(nval) + incode(i % pval)
else:
return incode(i, p+1)
return incode()
def decode(s, a=alphabet):
'''Takes a base 62 string in our alphabet and returns it in base10.'''
try:
s = str(s)
except Exception:
raise TypeError("Input must be a string.")
return sum([lookup(i) * pow(62,p) for p,i in enumerate(list(reversed(s)))])a
Here's my version for whomever needs it.
Why not just translate your id to a string? You just need a function that maps a digit between, say, 0 and 61 to a single letter (upper/lower case) or digit. Then apply this to create, say, 4-letter codes, and you've got 14.7 million URLs covered.
Here is a decent URL encoding function for PHP...
// From http://snipplr.com/view/22246/base62-encode--decode/
private function base_encode($val, $base=62, $chars='0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ') {
$str = '';
do {
$i = fmod($val, $base);
$str = $chars[$i] . $str;
$val = ($val - $i) / $base;
} while($val > 0);
return $str;
}
Don't know if anyone will find this useful - it is more of a 'hack n slash' method, yet is simple and works nicely if you want only specific chars.
$dictionary = "abcdfghjklmnpqrstvwxyz23456789";
$dictionary = str_split($dictionary);
// Encode
$str_id = '';
$base = count($dictionary);
while($id > 0) {
$rem = $id % $base;
$id = ($id - $rem) / $base;
$str_id .= $dictionary[$rem];
}
// Decode
$id_ar = str_split($str_id);
$id = 0;
for($i = count($id_ar); $i > 0; $i--) {
$id += array_search($id_ar[$i-1], $dictionary) * pow($base, $i - 1);
}
Did you omit O, 0, and i on purpose?
I just created a PHP class based on Ryan's solution.
<?php
$shorty = new App_Shorty();
echo 'ID: ' . 1000;
echo '<br/> Short link: ' . $shorty->encode(1000);
echo '<br/> Decoded Short Link: ' . $shorty->decode($shorty->encode(1000));
/**
* A nice shorting class based on Ryan Charmley's suggestion see the link on Stack Overflow below.
* #author Svetoslav Marinov (Slavi) | http://WebWeb.ca
* #see http://stackoverflow.com/questions/742013/how-to-code-a-url-shortener/10386945#10386945
*/
class App_Shorty {
/**
* Explicitly omitted: i, o, 1, 0 because they are confusing. Also use only lowercase ... as
* dictating this over the phone might be tough.
* #var string
*/
private $dictionary = "abcdfghjklmnpqrstvwxyz23456789";
private $dictionary_array = array();
public function __construct() {
$this->dictionary_array = str_split($this->dictionary);
}
/**
* Gets ID and converts it into a string.
* #param int $id
*/
public function encode($id) {
$str_id = '';
$base = count($this->dictionary_array);
while ($id > 0) {
$rem = $id % $base;
$id = ($id - $rem) / $base;
$str_id .= $this->dictionary_array[$rem];
}
return $str_id;
}
/**
* Converts /abc into an integer ID
* #param string
* #return int $id
*/
public function decode($str_id) {
$id = 0;
$id_ar = str_split($str_id);
$base = count($this->dictionary_array);
for ($i = count($id_ar); $i > 0; $i--) {
$id += array_search($id_ar[$i - 1], $this->dictionary_array) * pow($base, $i - 1);
}
return $id;
}
}
?>
public class TinyUrl {
private final String characterMap = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789";
private final int charBase = characterMap.length();
public String covertToCharacter(int num){
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
while (num > 0){
sb.append(characterMap.charAt(num % charBase));
num /= charBase;
}
return sb.reverse().toString();
}
public int covertToInteger(String str){
int num = 0;
for(int i = 0 ; i< str.length(); i++)
num += characterMap.indexOf(str.charAt(i)) * Math.pow(charBase , (str.length() - (i + 1)));
return num;
}
}
class TinyUrlTest{
public static void main(String[] args) {
TinyUrl tinyUrl = new TinyUrl();
int num = 122312215;
String url = tinyUrl.covertToCharacter(num);
System.out.println("Tiny url: " + url);
System.out.println("Id: " + tinyUrl.covertToInteger(url));
}
}
This is what I use:
# Generate a [0-9a-zA-Z] string
ALPHABET = map(str,range(0, 10)) + map(chr, range(97, 123) + range(65, 91))
def encode_id(id_number, alphabet=ALPHABET):
"""Convert an integer to a string."""
if id_number == 0:
return alphabet[0]
alphabet_len = len(alphabet) # Cache
result = ''
while id_number > 0:
id_number, mod = divmod(id_number, alphabet_len)
result = alphabet[mod] + result
return result
def decode_id(id_string, alphabet=ALPHABET):
"""Convert a string to an integer."""
alphabet_len = len(alphabet) # Cache
return sum([alphabet.index(char) * pow(alphabet_len, power) for power, char in enumerate(reversed(id_string))])
It's very fast and can take long integers.
For a similar project, to get a new key, I make a wrapper function around a random string generator that calls the generator until I get a string that hasn't already been used in my hashtable. This method will slow down once your name space starts to get full, but as you have said, even with only 6 characters, you have plenty of namespace to work with.
I have a variant of the problem, in that I store web pages from many different authors and need to prevent discovery of pages by guesswork. So my short URLs add a couple of extra digits to the Base-62 string for the page number. These extra digits are generated from information in the page record itself and they ensure that only 1 in 3844 URLs are valid (assuming 2-digit Base-62). You can see an outline description at http://mgscan.com/MBWL.
Very good answer, I have created a Golang implementation of the bjf:
package bjf
import (
"math"
"strings"
"strconv"
)
const alphabet = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789"
func Encode(num string) string {
n, _ := strconv.ParseUint(num, 10, 64)
t := make([]byte, 0)
/* Special case */
if n == 0 {
return string(alphabet[0])
}
/* Map */
for n > 0 {
r := n % uint64(len(alphabet))
t = append(t, alphabet[r])
n = n / uint64(len(alphabet))
}
/* Reverse */
for i, j := 0, len(t) - 1; i < j; i, j = i + 1, j - 1 {
t[i], t[j] = t[j], t[i]
}
return string(t)
}
func Decode(token string) int {
r := int(0)
p := float64(len(token)) - 1
for i := 0; i < len(token); i++ {
r += strings.Index(alphabet, string(token[i])) * int(math.Pow(float64(len(alphabet)), p))
p--
}
return r
}
Hosted at github: https://github.com/xor-gate/go-bjf
Implementation in Scala:
class Encoder(alphabet: String) extends (Long => String) {
val Base = alphabet.size
override def apply(number: Long) = {
def encode(current: Long): List[Int] = {
if (current == 0) Nil
else (current % Base).toInt :: encode(current / Base)
}
encode(number).reverse
.map(current => alphabet.charAt(current)).mkString
}
}
class Decoder(alphabet: String) extends (String => Long) {
val Base = alphabet.size
override def apply(string: String) = {
def decode(current: Long, encodedPart: String): Long = {
if (encodedPart.size == 0) current
else decode(current * Base + alphabet.indexOf(encodedPart.head),encodedPart.tail)
}
decode(0,string)
}
}
Test example with Scala test:
import org.scalatest.{FlatSpec, Matchers}
class DecoderAndEncoderTest extends FlatSpec with Matchers {
val Alphabet = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789"
"A number with base 10" should "be correctly encoded into base 62 string" in {
val encoder = new Encoder(Alphabet)
encoder(127) should be ("cd")
encoder(543513414) should be ("KWGPy")
}
"A base 62 string" should "be correctly decoded into a number with base 10" in {
val decoder = new Decoder(Alphabet)
decoder("cd") should be (127)
decoder("KWGPy") should be (543513414)
}
}
Function based in Xeoncross Class
function shortly($input){
$dictionary = ['a','b','c','d','e','f','g','h','i','j','k','l','m','n','o','p','q','r','s','t','u','v','w','x','y','z','A','B','C','D','E','F','G','H','I','J','K','L','M','N','O','P','Q','R','S','T','U','V','W','X','Y','Z','0','1','2','3','4','5','6','7','8','9'];
if($input===0)
return $dictionary[0];
$base = count($dictionary);
if(is_numeric($input)){
$result = [];
while($input > 0){
$result[] = $dictionary[($input % $base)];
$input = floor($input / $base);
}
return join("", array_reverse($result));
}
$i = 0;
$input = str_split($input);
foreach($input as $char){
$pos = array_search($char, $dictionary);
$i = $i * $base + $pos;
}
return $i;
}
Here is a Node.js implementation that is likely to bit.ly. generate a highly random seven-character string.
It uses Node.js crypto to generate a highly random 25 charset rather than randomly selecting seven characters.
var crypto = require("crypto");
exports.shortURL = new function () {
this.getShortURL = function () {
var sURL = '',
_rand = crypto.randomBytes(25).toString('hex'),
_base = _rand.length;
for (var i = 0; i < 7; i++)
sURL += _rand.charAt(Math.floor(Math.random() * _rand.length));
return sURL;
};
}
My Python 3 version
base_list = list("0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ")
base = len(base_list)
def encode(num: int):
result = []
if num == 0:
result.append(base_list[0])
while num > 0:
result.append(base_list[num % base])
num //= base
print("".join(reversed(result)))
def decode(code: str):
num = 0
code_list = list(code)
for index, code in enumerate(reversed(code_list)):
num += base_list.index(code) * base ** index
print(num)
if __name__ == '__main__':
encode(341413134141)
decode("60FoItT")
For a quality Node.js / JavaScript solution, see the id-shortener module, which is thoroughly tested and has been used in production for months.
It provides an efficient id / URL shortener backed by pluggable storage defaulting to Redis, and you can even customize your short id character set and whether or not shortening is idempotent. This is an important distinction that not all URL shorteners take into account.
In relation to other answers here, this module implements the Marcel Jackwerth's excellent accepted answer above.
The core of the solution is provided by the following Redis Lua snippet:
local sequence = redis.call('incr', KEYS[1])
local chars = '0123456789ABCDEFGHJKLMNPQRSTUVWXYZ_abcdefghijkmnopqrstuvwxyz'
local remaining = sequence
local slug = ''
while (remaining > 0) do
local d = (remaining % 60)
local character = string.sub(chars, d + 1, d + 1)
slug = character .. slug
remaining = (remaining - d) / 60
end
redis.call('hset', KEYS[2], slug, ARGV[1])
return slug
Why not just generate a random string and append it to the base URL? This is a very simplified version of doing this in C#.
static string chars = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ1234567890";
static string baseUrl = "https://google.com/";
private static string RandomString(int length)
{
char[] s = new char[length];
Random rnd = new Random();
for (int x = 0; x < length; x++)
{
s[x] = chars[rnd.Next(chars.Length)];
}
Thread.Sleep(10);
return new String(s);
}
Then just add the append the random string to the baseURL:
string tinyURL = baseUrl + RandomString(5);
Remember this is a very simplified version of doing this and it's possible the RandomString method could create duplicate strings. In production you would want to take in account for duplicate strings to ensure you will always have a unique URL. I have some code that takes account for duplicate strings by querying a database table I could share if anyone is interested.
This is my initial thoughts, and more thinking can be done, or some simulation can be made to see if it works well or any improvement is needed:
My answer is to remember the long URL in the database, and use the ID 0 to 9999999999999999 (or however large the number is needed).
But the ID 0 to 9999999999999999 can be an issue, because
it can be shorter if we use hexadecimal, or even base62 or base64. (base64 just like YouTube using A-Z a-z 0-9 _ and -)
if it increases from 0 to 9999999999999999 uniformly, then hackers can visit them in that order and know what URLs people are sending each other, so it can be a privacy issue
We can do this:
have one server allocate 0 to 999 to one server, Server A, so now Server A has 1000 of such IDs. So if there are 20 or 200 servers constantly wanting new IDs, it doesn't have to keep asking for each new ID, but rather asking once for 1000 IDs
for the ID 1, for example, reverse the bits. So 000...00000001 becomes 10000...000, so that when converted to base64, it will be non-uniformly increasing IDs each time.
use XOR to flip the bits for the final IDs. For example, XOR with 0xD5AA96...2373 (like a secret key), and the some bits will be flipped. (whenever the secret key has the 1 bit on, it will flip the bit of the ID). This will make the IDs even harder to guess and appear more random
Following this scheme, the single server that allocates the IDs can form the IDs, and so can the 20 or 200 servers requesting the allocation of IDs. The allocating server has to use a lock / semaphore to prevent two requesting servers from getting the same batch (or if it is accepting one connection at a time, this already solves the problem). So we don't want the line (queue) to be too long for waiting to get an allocation. So that's why allocating 1000 or 10000 at a time can solve the issue.
Related
I'm working on a basic password generator for This Reddit Programming Exercise. I have very simple password generation working in Kotlin, but I'm struggling to come up with a good way to guarantee a specific minimum number of each character type (i.e. at least 2 each of Upper, Lower, Digit, and special character).
I could easily just do two of each to start the password, but I want them to be randomly distributed, not all front-loaded. I also thought of inserting the characters randomly into a character array, rather than appending to a string, but I was wondering if maybe there is a better way.
Here is what I have currently:
private fun generatePassword() {
var password = ""
val passwordLength = (8..25).random()
for (i in 0..passwordLength) {
val charType = (1..5).random()
when (charType) {
1 -> password += lettersLower[(0..lettersLower.size).random()]
2 -> password += lettersUpper[(0..lettersUpper.size).random()]
3 -> password += numbers[(0..numbers.size).random()]
4 -> password += symbols[(0..symbols.size).random()]
}
}
println(password)
}
This works and generates a random password of a random length of 8-24 characters, and contains a random combination of uppercase letters, lowercase letters, digits, and special characters, but it doesn't guarantee the presence of any specific number of each type, like most websites require nowadays.
I thought of doing something like this:
private fun generatePassword() {
var password: ArrayList<Char> = arrayListOf()
var newChar:Char
var numLow = 0
var numUpp = 0
var numDig = 0
var numSpe = 0
while (numLow < 2){
newChar = lettersLower[(0..lettersLower.size).random()]
password.add((0..password.size).random(), newChar)
numLow++
}
while (numUpp < 2){
newChar = lettersUpper[(0..lettersUpper.size).random()]
password.add((0..password.size).random(), newChar)
numUpp++
}
while (numDig < 2){
newChar = numbers[(0..numbers.size).random()]
password.add((0..password.size).random(), newChar)
numDig++
}
while (numSpe < 2){
newChar = symbols[(0..symbols.size).random()]
password.add((0..password.size).random(), newChar)
numSpe++
}
val passwordLength = (8..25).random() - password.size
for (i in 0..passwordLength) {
val charType = (1..5).random()
when (charType) {
1 -> {
newChar = lettersLower[(0..lettersLower.size).random()]
password.add(newChar)
}
2 -> {
newChar = lettersUpper[(0..lettersUpper.size).random()]
password.add(newChar)
}
3 -> {
newChar = numbers[(0..numbers.size).random()]
password.add(newChar)
}
4 -> {
newChar = symbols[(0..symbols.size).random()]
password.add(newChar)
}
}
}
for (i in password.indices){
print(password[i])
}
print("\n")
}
But that doesn't seem particularly concise. The other option I thought of is to check if the password contains two of each type of character and generate a new one if it doesn't, but that seems awfully inefficient. Is there a better way to ensure that if I run my RNG 8+ times it will return at least, but not exactly, two ones, two twos, two threes, and two fours?
Here's my random function, if that helps:
// Random function via SO user #s1m0nw1 (https://stackoverflow.com/a/49507413)
private fun ClosedRange<Int>.random() = (Math.random() * (endInclusive - start) + start).toInt()
I also found this SO post in Java, but it's also not very concise and I'm wondering if there is a more general purpose, more concise solution to ensure a minimum number of occurrences for each possible outcome of an RNG over a number of trials greater than the sum of those minimum occurrences.
Sorry for the rambling post. Thanks in advance for your insight.
I think your second version is on the right track. It can be simplified to:
import java.util.Random
fun generatePassword() : String {
// this defines the classes of characters
// and their corresponding minimum occurrences
val charClasses = arrayOf(
('a'..'z').asIterable().toList() to 2,
('A'..'Z').asIterable().toList() to 2,
('0'..'9').asIterable().toList() to 2,
"!##$%^&*()_+".asIterable().toList() to 2
)
val maxLen = 24;
val minLen = 8;
var password = StringBuilder()
val random = Random()
charClasses.forEach {(chars, minOccur) ->
(0..minOccur).forEach {
password.insert(
if (password.isEmpty()) 0 else random.nextInt(password.length),
chars[random.nextInt(chars.size)])
}
}
((password.length + 1)..(random.nextInt(maxLen - minLen + 1) + minLen)).forEach {
val selected = charClasses[random.nextInt(charClasses.size)]
password.append(selected.first[random.nextInt(selected.first.size)])
}
return password.toString()
}
I have a List of a custom CallRecord objects
public class CallRecord {
private String callId;
private String aNum;
private String bNum;
private int seqNum;
private byte causeForOutput;
private int duration;
private RecordType recordType;
.
.
.
}
There are two logical conditions and the output of each is:
Highest seqNum, sum(duration)
Highest seqNum, sum(duration), highest causeForOutput
As per my understanding, Stream.max(), Collectors.summarizingInt() and so on will either require several iterations for the above result. I also came across a thread suggesting custom collector but I am unsure.
Below is the simple, pre-Java 8 code that is serving the purpose:
if (...) {
for (CallRecord currentRecord : completeCallRecords) {
highestSeqNum = currentRecord.getSeqNum() > highestSeqNum ? currentRecord.getSeqNum() : highestSeqNum;
sumOfDuration += currentRecord.getDuration();
}
} else {
byte highestCauseForOutput = 0;
for (CallRecord currentRecord : completeCallRecords) {
highestSeqNum = currentRecord.getSeqNum() > highestSeqNum ? currentRecord.getSeqNum() : highestSeqNum;
sumOfDuration += currentRecord.getDuration();
highestCauseForOutput = currentRecord.getCauseForOutput() > highestCauseForOutput ? currentRecord.getCauseForOutput() : highestCauseForOutput;
}
}
Your desire to do everything in a single iteration is irrational. You should strive for simplicity first, performance if necessary, but insisting on a single iteration is neither.
The performance depends on too many factors to make a prediction in advance. The process of iterating (over a plain collection) itself is not necessarily an expensive operation and may even benefit from a simpler loop body in a way that makes multiple traversals with a straight-forward operation more efficient than a single traversal trying to do everything at once. The only way to find out, is to measure using the actual operations.
Converting the operation to Stream operations may simplify the code, if you use it straight-forwardly, i.e.
int highestSeqNum=
completeCallRecords.stream().mapToInt(CallRecord::getSeqNum).max().orElse(-1);
int sumOfDuration=
completeCallRecords.stream().mapToInt(CallRecord::getDuration).sum();
if(!condition) {
byte highestCauseForOutput = (byte)
completeCallRecords.stream().mapToInt(CallRecord::getCauseForOutput).max().orElse(0);
}
If you still feel uncomfortable with the fact that there are multiple iterations, you could try to write a custom collector performing all operations at once, but the result will not be better than your loop, neither in terms of readability nor efficiency.
Still, I’d prefer avoiding code duplication over trying to do everything in one loop, i.e.
for(CallRecord currentRecord : completeCallRecords) {
int nextSeqNum = currentRecord.getSeqNum();
highestSeqNum = nextSeqNum > highestSeqNum ? nextSeqNum : highestSeqNum;
sumOfDuration += currentRecord.getDuration();
}
if(!condition) {
byte highestCauseForOutput = 0;
for(CallRecord currentRecord : completeCallRecords) {
byte next = currentRecord.getCauseForOutput();
highestCauseForOutput = next > highestCauseForOutput? next: highestCauseForOutput;
}
}
With Java-8 you can resolved it with a Collector with no redudant iteration.
Normally, we can use the factory methods from Collectors, but in your case you need to implement a custom Collector, that reduces a Stream<CallRecord> to an instance of SummarizingCallRecord which cotains the attributes you require.
Mutable accumulation/result type:
class SummarizingCallRecord {
private int highestSeqNum = 0;
private int sumDuration = 0;
// getters/setters ...
}
Custom collector:
BiConsumer<SummarizingCallRecord, CallRecord> myAccumulator = (a, callRecord) -> {
a.setHighestSeqNum(Math.max(a.getHighestSeqNum(), callRecord.getSeqNum()));
a.setSumDuration(a.getSumDuration() + callRecord.getDuration());
};
BinaryOperator<SummarizingCallRecord> myCombiner = (a1, a2) -> {
a1.setHighestSeqNum(Math.max(a1.getHighestSeqNum(), a2.getHighestSeqNum()));
a1.setSumDuration(a1.getSumDuration() + a2.getSumDuration());
return a1;
};
Collector<CallRecord, SummarizingCallRecord, SummarizingCallRecord> myCollector =
Collector.of(
() -> new SummarizinCallRecord(),
myAccumulator,
myCombiner,
// Collector.Characteristics.CONCURRENT/IDENTITY_FINISH/UNORDERED
);
Execution example:
List<CallRecord> callRecords = new ArrayList<>();
callRecords.add(new CallRecord(1, 100));
callRecords.add(new CallRecord(5, 50));
callRecords.add(new CallRecord(3, 1000));
SummarizingCallRecord summarizingCallRecord = callRecords.stream()
.collect(myCollector);
// Result:
// summarizingCallRecord.highestSeqNum = 5
// summarizingCallRecord.sumDuration = 1150
You don't need and should not implement the logic by Stream API because the tradition for-loop is simple enough and the Java 8 Stream API can't make it simpler:
int highestSeqNum = 0;
long sumOfDuration = 0;
byte highestCauseForOutput = 0; // just get it even if it may not be used. there is no performance hurt.
for(CallRecord currentRecord : completeCallRecords) {
highestSeqNum = Math.max(highestSeqNum, currentRecord.getSeqNum());
sumOfDuration += currentRecord.getDuration();
highestCauseForOutput = Math.max(highestCauseForOutput, currentRecord.getCauseForOutput());
}
// Do something with or without highestCauseForOutput.
I search and users from active directory. My code is below:
List<DirectoryEntry> dirEntries = ActiveDirectoryActions.getListByQuery("(&(objectClass=user)(displayName~=*" + q + "*))");
for (int i = 0; i < dirEntries.Count; i++)
{
SiteSearchResult r = new SiteSearchResult();
r.title = dirEntries[i].Properties["displayName"].Value.ToString();
r.url = "/" + lang + "/directory/user/" + dirEntries[i].Properties["sAMAccountName"].Value.ToString();
r.content = dirEntries[i].Properties["title"].Value.ToString();
result.Add(r);
}
And it is getListByQuery() function
public static List<DirectoryEntry> getListByQuery(string q)
{
DirectorySearcher drSearch = new DirectorySearcher(rootEntry);
drSearch.Filter = "(distinguishedName=" + Config.xml().Root.Elements("active_directory").Elements("root_ou").Select(x => x.Value).FirstOrDefault().ToString() + ")";
DirectoryEntry searchRoot = drSearch.FindAll()[0].GetDirectoryEntry();
drSearch.SearchRoot = searchRoot;
drSearch.Filter = q;
List<DirectoryEntry> r = new List<DirectoryEntry>();
SearchResultCollection sr = drSearch.FindAll();
for (int i = 0; i < sr.Count; i++)
{
r.Add(sr[i].GetDirectoryEntry());
}
return r;
}
Everthing is ok on my local server. But gives error on global server when I search integer value. And that is interesting when the value less than 1000 (<1000) .
[NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an
object.] Myproject.Controllers.SearchController.Index(String
lang, String q) in
D:\dotNET\Myproject\Myproject\Controllers\SearchController.cs:60
Help please.
I think there are few issues you need to check
1) Does it make sense to call DirectoryEntry.FindAll() two times? Instead of using DirectorySearcher(rootEntry) you could try to set
string ldapPath = "LDAP://" + Config.xml().Root.Elements("active_directory").Elements("root_ou").Select(x => x.Value).FirstOrDefault().ToString();
DirectoryEntry de = new DirectoryEntry(ldapPath);
DirectorySearcher desearch = new DirectorySearcher(de);
deSearch.Filter = ...
2) Approximate search ~= might be not compatible with a substring search (=*substring*), e.g. for me it does not work. So try to change to =*1000* (without ~)
3) FindAll() in both cases could return null, so you should check for null in both cases.
4) [MSDN]
Due to implementation restrictions, the SearchResultCollection class
cannot release all of its unmanaged resources when it is garbage
collected. To prevent a memory leak, you must call the Dispose method
when the SearchResultCollection object is no longer needed.
So you either need to call sr.Dispose or use a using Statement.
i would like to explain my problem by the following example.
assume the word: abc
a has variants: ä, à
b has no variants.
c has variants: ç
so the possible words are:
abc
äbc
àbc
abç
äbç
àbç
now i am looking for the algorithm that prints all word variantions for abritray words with arbitray lettervariants.
I would recommend you to solve this recursively. Here's some Java code for you to get started:
static Map<Character, char[]> variants = new HashMap<Character, char[]>() {{
put('a', new char[] {'ä', 'à'});
put('b', new char[] { });
put('c', new char[] { 'ç' });
}};
public static Set<String> variation(String str) {
Set<String> result = new HashSet<String>();
if (str.isEmpty()) {
result.add("");
return result;
}
char c = str.charAt(0);
for (String tailVariant : variation(str.substring(1))) {
result.add(c + tailVariant);
for (char variant : variants.get(c))
result.add(variant + tailVariant);
}
return result;
}
Test:
public static void main(String[] args) {
for (String str : variation("abc"))
System.out.println(str);
}
Output:
abc
àbç
äbc
àbc
äbç
abç
A quickly hacked solution in Python:
def word_variants(variants):
print_variants("", 1, variants);
def print_variants(word, i, variants):
if i > len(variants):
print word
else:
for variant in variants[i]:
print_variants(word + variant, i + 1, variants)
variants = dict()
variants[1] = ['a0', 'a1', 'a2']
variants[2] = ['b0']
variants[3] = ['c0', 'c1']
word_variants(variants)
Common part:
string[] letterEquiv = { "aäà", "b", "cç", "d", "eèé" };
// Here we make a dictionary where the key is the "base" letter and the value is an array of alternatives
var lookup = letterEquiv
.Select(p => p.ToCharArray())
.SelectMany(p => p, (p, q) => new { key = q, values = p }).ToDictionary(p => p.key, p => p.values);
A recursive variation written in C#.
List<string> resultsRecursive = new List<string>();
// I'm using an anonymous method that "closes" around resultsRecursive and lookup. You could make it a standard method that accepts as a parameter the two.
// Recursive anonymous methods must be declared in this way in C#. Nothing to see.
Action<string, int, char[]> recursive = null;
recursive = (str, ix, str2) =>
{
// In the first loop str2 is null, so we create the place where the string will be built.
if (str2 == null)
{
str2 = new char[str.Length];
}
// The possible variations for the current character
var equivs = lookup[str[ix]];
// For each variation
foreach (var eq in equivs)
{
// We save the current variation for the current character
str2[ix] = eq;
// If we haven't reached the end of the string
if (ix < str.Length - 1)
{
// We recurse, increasing the index
recursive(str, ix + 1, str2);
}
else
{
// We save the string
resultsRecursive.Add(new string(str2));
}
}
};
// We launch our function
recursive("abcdeabcde", 0, null);
// The results are in resultsRecursive
A non-recursive version
List<string> resultsNonRecursive = new List<string>();
// I'm using an anonymous method that "closes" around resultsNonRecursive and lookup. You could make it a standard method that accepts as a parameter the two.
Action<string> nonRecursive = (str) =>
{
// We will have two arrays, of the same length of the string. One will contain
// the possible variations for that letter, the other will contain the "current"
// "chosen" variation of that letter
char[][] equivs = new char[str.Length][];
int[] ixes = new int[str.Length];
for (int i = 0; i < ixes.Length; i++)
{
// We start with index -1 so that the first increase will bring it to 0
equivs[i] = lookup[str[i]];
ixes[i] = -1;
}
// The current "workin" index of the original string
int ix = 0;
// The place where the string will be built.
char[] str2 = new char[str.Length];
// The loop will break when we will have to increment the letter with index -1
while (ix >= 0)
{
// We select the next possible variation for the current character
ixes[ix]++;
// If we have exausted the possible variations of the current character
if (ixes[ix] == equivs[ix].Length)
{
// Reset the current character to -1
ixes[ix] = -1;
// And loop back to the previous character
ix--;
continue;
}
// We save the current variation for the current character
str2[ix] = equivs[ix][ixes[ix]];
// If we are setting the last character of the string, then the string
// is complete
if (ix == str.Length - 1)
{
// And we save it
resultsNonRecursive.Add(new string(str2));
}
else
{
// Otherwise we have to do everything for the next character
ix++;
}
}
};
// We launch our function
nonRecursive("abcdeabcde");
// The results are in resultsNonRecursive
Both heavily commented.
I apologize for creating a similar thread to many that are out there now, but I mainly wanted to also get some insight on some methods.
I have a list of Strings (could be just 1 or over a 1000)
Format = XXX-XXXXX-XX where each one is alphanumeric
I am trying to generate a unique string (currently 18 in length but probably could be longer ensuring not to maximize file length or path length) that I could reproduce if I have that same list. Order doesn't matter; although I may be interested if its easier to restrict the order as well.
My current Java code is follows (which failed today, hence why I am here):
public String createOutputFileName(ArrayList alInput, EnumFPFunction efpf, boolean pHeaders) {
/* create file name based on input list */
String sFileName = "";
long partNum = 0;
for (String sGPN : alInput) {
sGPN = sGPN.replaceAll("-", ""); //remove dashes
partNum += Long.parseLong(sGPN, 36); //(base 36)
}
sFileName = Long.toString(partNum);
if (sFileName.length() > 19) {
sFileName.substring(0, 18); //Max length of 19
}
return alInput;
}
So obviously just adding them did not work out so well I found out (also think I should take last 18 digits and not first 18)
Are there any good methods out there (possibly CRC related) that would work?
To assist with my key creation:
The first 3 characters are almost always numeric and would probably have many duplicate (out of 100, there may only be 10 different starting numbers)
These characters are not allowed - I,O
There will never be a character then a number in the last two alphachar subset.
I would use the system time. Here's how you might do it in Java:
public String createOutputFileName() {
long mills = System.currentTimeMillis();
long nanos = System.nanoTime();
return mills + " " + nanos;
}
If you want to add some information about the items and their part numbers, you can, of course!
======== EDIT: "What do I mean by batch object" =========
class Batch {
ArrayList<Item> itemsToProcess;
String inputFilename; // input to external process
boolean processingFinished;
public Batch(ArrayList<Item> itemsToProcess) {
this.itemsToProcess = itemsToProcess;
inputFilename = null;
processingFinished = false;
}
public void processWithExternal() {
if(inputFilename != null || processingFinished) {
throw new IllegalStateException("Cannot initiate process more than once!");
}
String base = System.currentTimeMillis() + " " + System.nanoTime();
this.inputFilename = base + "_input";
writeItemsToFile();
// however you build your process, do it here
Process p = new ProcessBuilder("myProcess","myargs", inputFilename);
p.start();
p.waitFor();
processingFinished = true;
}
private void writeItemsToFile() {
PrintWriter out = new PrintWriter(new BufferedWriter(new FileWriter(inputFilename)));
int flushcount = 0;
for(Item item : itemsToProcess) {
String output = item.getFileRepresentation();
out.println(output);
if(++flushcount % 10 == 0) out.flush();
}
out.flush();
out.close();
}
}
In addition to GlowCoder's response, I have thought of another "decent one" that would work.
Instead of just adding the list in base 36, I would do two separate things to the same list.
In this case, since there is no way for negative or decimal numbers, adding every number and multiplying every number separately and concatenating these base36 number strings isn't a bad way either.
In my case, I would take the last nine digits of the added number and last nine of the multiplied number. This would eliminate my previous errors and make it quite robust. It obviously is still possible for errors once overflow starts occurring, but could also work in this case. Extending the allowable string length would make it more robust as well.
Sample code:
public String createOutputFileName(ArrayList alInput, EnumFPFunction efpf, boolean pHeaders) {
/* create file name based on input list */
String sFileName1 = "";
String sFileName2 = "";
long partNum1 = 0; // Starting point for addition
long partNum2 = 1; // Starting point for multiplication
for (String sGPN : alInput) {
//remove dashes
sGPN = sGPN.replaceAll("-", "");
partNum1 += Long.parseLong(sGPN, 36); //(base 36)
partNum2 *= Long.parseLong(sGPN, 36); //(base 36)
}
// Initial strings
sFileName1 = "000000000" + Long.toString(partNum1, 36); // base 36
sFileName2 = "000000000" + Long.toString(partNum2, 36); // base 36
// Cropped strings
sFileName1 = sFileName1.substring(sFileName1.length()-9, sFileName1.length());
sFileName2 = sFileName2.substring(sFileName2.length()-9, sFileName2.length());
return sFileName1 + sFileName2;
}